Pages

Tuesday, 20 November 2012

India’s youngest political
heir Rahul Gandhi is all set to lead India’s oldest National Party, the Indian
national Congress in the forthcoming 2014 Lok Sabha elections. However, instead
of focusing on the policies and the paradigm shift from the older Mrs. Gandhi
to the vibrant Rahul and the Congress strategy to get the requisite
numbers or the policies that may be adopted, the question doing the rounds is
whether Rahul Gandhi is the perfect candidate to lead the Congress and is he
Prime Ministerial material? This isolationist targeting of one individual
speaks volumes about the immaturity of the Indian mentality. I am yet to
witness like treatment to other members of the Indian National Congress or any
of the members of other parties being questioned and scrutinised to this
detail.

Rahul Gandhi, an active
participant of the first family in Indian politics is one of the favourite
subjects for the Opposition here in India. The youth leader is popular for
being a recluse in assuming key positions in the government preferring Party
responsibility to direct governance. Many of the Opposition leaders consider the
young scion to be a ‘recluse’ shying away from media attention and a man who
does not want to assume official responsibility.

Unfortunately the media
portrayal of the junior Gandhi has been graphical but never complete. This
demure gentleman has a different style of working and an attitude that
typically defies conventional Indian Polity. What the common man is aware of is
that he is famous for lashing out without reservations against the Mayawati
government when the need arose. He has been vociferous in his advocacy of the
plight of the farmers in Maharashtra (The famous Kalavati case in Parliament
made headlines at that point) The Congress leader has ensured that he has
consciously turned down every offer to be a part of the Cabinet. And this is
where the conflict in our story occurs. The Indian populace is acclimatised to
the notion that if their leaders are not working with a formal position in the
centre, or if they aren't a part of the erstwhile Cabinet committee either they
are not worthy of it or they aren’t too confident of yourself. In the case of
the young Gandhi, people have been quite blatant in assuming the latter, a
proposition which is only a sign of hasty judgement for a leader who has spent
less than a decade in politics.

Rahul Gandhi has invited media
attention not only as a politician; read the New York Times 1989 edition and
you will see a prejudice against him even as a young lad. His entry into St.
Stephen’s was perhaps the first of many controversies to follow. The Times of
India newspaper simultaneously and quite sensibly took the lead stating the
controversy over Rahul's entry into St. Stephen's “is indicative of how
insensitive our social reactions have progressively become.” Much later when he
entered the political fray the hullaballoo was raised as to whether he had
completed his degree or not, the irony being that educational qualifications
are not a constitutional pre- requisite for any candidate standing for the
elections. Much later the issue died a natural death. Some believe it is the
price you pay as a celebrity. I think it’s the peril of being a Gandhi.

In 2004, when he was chosen by
his mother as the candidate from Amethi, the speculation started as to whose
footsteps would he follow. Would he be an aggressive male version of his
grandmother Indira or his soft spoken yet firm politician father Rajiv? The
second inconsequential question was why he and not his equally charismatic
sister Priyanka had been chosen to contest the elections. It was stated in The
Guardian that some political commentators
believed that the main effect of Rahul Gandhi's run for office would be
to stop the decline of the Congress party in Uttar Pradesh. Rahul won with a
thumping majority. Unfortunately, different sections of the Indian diaspora be
it the Opposition, the media or the people have always been comparing the heir-
apparent to the legacy that he carries with him. What we fail to understand is
that each politician has his own USP. By comparing the various generations of
politicians and the class of politicians this family has produced, we are only
committing a reprehensible error. Where Pandit Nehru lived in the comfort of
luxury, Rahul too lived a privileged along with the knowledge that his father
and grandmother had been brutally assassinated and the additional awareness
that almost half the country did not accept his mother only due to her Italian
origin. Hailing from a family that has gifted the country with three Prime
Ministers, it is difficult to keep up with the tenor of the Indian polity
especially when your vision is a long term goal where the rest of the political
class is worried about the immediate benefits.

If one observes at the outset,
defying convention for the better is something the Nehru-Gandhi clan embellishes.
Motilal Nehru was a moderate who believed that Indians should play a part in
politics whilst under the British stronghold on India. He believed in moderate
politics and is reported to have even told his son that this was the best
solution. Jawaharlal Nehru on the other hand pursued aggressive nationalism and
held close the idea of a Free India. Post –independence India had NAM under the
aegis of Nehru, a concept which the world had not countered until then. His
daughter Indira earned the title, ‘The only man in the Cabinet’ for her grit
and determination. The analysts wrote her off after 1975. Her comeback was
least expected but nonetheless it happened. Her son Rajiv was a politician
forced- in- the making it seemed on the face of it but very soon the Indian
mise-en-scène changed and he was the fresh face of the Indian democracy. Bofors
marred his tenure and with the tragic death of Rajiv Gandhi India lost another
part of this family’s legacy.

The reason behind listing the
varying personae of the Gandhi family is to bring to the reader’s notice that
each generation is surrounded with a different circumstance, a different
outlook and each one pursued a different path towards the same goal. Each made
their fair share of blunders and history is witness that each of them emerged
as better leaders. In the case of Rahul Gandhi, notice that he prefers to work
at the grass- root level, something most politicians should be doing but really
aren’t.

Why grassroot politics is
essential:

The theory of Bharat versus
India may not be accepted but no one can refute the fact that there exists a
divide between rural and urban India and urban India itself is further divided
into the privileged and unprivileged factions. Amidst all this comes a
politician who believes the best way to win the confidence of the people is to
be among them, away from the limelight.

To quote the man himself, “If
the country is to be changed, it cannot be changed from the top, it can be
changed from the ground level. Policies can be from the top, ideas can come
from the top, thoughts can come from the top, but their implementation has to
be at the level of municipalities, panchayats and wards” Much to the chagrin of
some of my readers I find nothing wrong in this ideology. In fact I find it the
hallmark of a true leader. The need of the hour is to connect with the
proletariat in order to get the system working.

Opposition and criticism
especially in Politics is inevitable but revulsion to the name not the policy
is unacceptable. The South Asian Mail recently quoted a senior BJP leader’s
statement on Rahul Gandhi comparing him to a wedding horse. The statement which
received sharp criticism from the Congress reads, “The horse is always stuck at
one place. It does not move. Similarly, Rahul Gandhi also does not move. Many
efforts are being made to get him to do something, but he doesn't. Some try to
push him but he still refuses to move. Till the time he isn't ready, how can
Manmohan Singh do anything? This is the crisis today.” The crisis unfortunately
is less with Rahul Gandhi’s methods of functioning and more with the
Opposition’s expectations from him to function in a stereotypical fashion in a
typecast political rut.

What has various leaders
disgruntled is not this young leader’s choice to refrain from assuming a post
in the Government but their inability to understand why he has chosen this
path. A politician may make a Cabinet but the Cabinet is not the only criteria
to be a certified excellent politician. Unfortunately, many seem to disagree with
this proposition. The wanton hype created by right wing leaders and their loyal
party workers has almost ensured that masses have already a pre- conceived
notion that this young leader may not their best choice. If one consciously
spends some time to read through you will come across these following oft-
neglected facts :

In 2004, in an interview to George
Iype, Rahul Gandhi’s mission statement was, ‘I will create a new brand of Indian
politics.’ And he did. According to the DNA newspaper, the number of Youth
members grew from a dismal two lakhs to a whopping twenty- five lakhs under
this same dark horse. A resurrection of a nearly defunct organisation led to a
positive difference in youth participation, a facet of party politics that most
others quite regularly neglect. The IYC in Tamil Nadu (a non-Congress – ruled
state if I may add) itself saw 12.5 lakh youth joining hands with the young
leader.

This young leader believes “Truth’ is
the most important principle in politics.

His method of open membership in the
Youth wing of the Congress has ensured that people interested in becoming
members are inducted directly into the organisation. The aim is to increase the
cadre-base and to empower the youth of the country by helping them enter the
political sphere. Those criticising him could possibly take note that with the
Parliament home to octogenarians and septuagenarians what India currently needs
is maximum young blood in the political fray and that can only happen if there
is someone who knows the political arena like the back of his hand. The
Congress has left that responsibility to Rahul Gandhi. In fact the other
parties should perhaps follow suit in the interest of the nation.

The reason behind this
article is to bring to light that a politician without a Cabinet position is
capable of creating a difference. Talk about the Gandhi family and 1975 comes
into the picture. What many have quite
clearly forgotten is the family's positive contributions in the pre- Emergency and in the post Emergency era as well.

This heir apparent has made his fair share
of mistakes but how can any politician learn without making a mistake. For now
we need to give him some space to bloom independently rather than live in the
shadow of his family’s past. He has already proved his mettle with the young
people in the Congress, and it is his class of non- media loving people
oriented politicians that India needs today if we really need want a
progressive state.

For his part Rahul is no
political accident. His lifeblood in that sense is politics. What is
unacceptable is trying to fit him in the mould of the ancestry he belongs.
Unfortunately, politics is not determined by your lineage but your performance
and just like the others even Rahul Gandhi should be judged by his performance
in the years to come. I find it miserable that each time I tweet about the
young leader I am countered with baseless allegations filled with sarcasm and
dry humor in bad taste. Rather than speculating on whether he would make a fine
Prime Minister for it is time to take cognizance of his vision and his interest in
furthering grassroot politics and youth participation. If he prefers to follow his path without receiving the
limelight on the National front so be it. Judge him on his methodology not his
name.

"Do not be led by others,

awaken your own mind,

amass your own experience,

and decide for yourself your
own path."

-The Atharva Ved

May be its time to let this
young leader choose his own path.

To end this piece I rephrase
what the 1989 Times of India stated,

'Whatever be any party's
disagreement with Mr. Rajiv Gandhi’s (*or any of the previous of the Gandhi)
policies, they should not be brought to bear on his offspring.''

Katherine. A

The writer does not bear any
affiliations to the Indian National Congress or any other political party. The
views expressed are personal.

Saturday, 17 November 2012

Social Networking sites like Facebook and Twitter have
become the beehive of unwanted activity of late buzzing with social, political,
and religious abuses. This is obviously due to provocative hate mongers spread
all over these sites. These serial
abusers are actually fuelled by different and rather terrifying sources be it
political or otherwise. Their intention and goal is to incite negativity in the
people by attacking the most sensitive thing i.e. religious beliefs. Some do it
for political advantage, others to cause a ruckus, whatever the reason it is
simply unacceptable. What is disturbing is the fact that some choose to be
unaware of this situation.

From the experience of the last few months on Twitter and
Facebook, I have realised the fact that what we were taught in black and white
in school days is totally opposite to the real condition of Indian politics,
meaning of freedom of expression, and the way of governance in all its
practicality. What I have and I am sure you too have read is the opening lines
to the Preamble, "We the people of India having solemnly resolved to
constitute India into a Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic, Republic and
to secure to all its citizens . . ." Have we truly accepted secularism?
Well I can't really vouch for it because I am not treated as an equal because
of my religious beliefs. You may ask, Why? Take the example of my own brother
who has been at the receiving end of a lot of public hatred and all because he
chose to use his freedom of expression and support the political party of his
choice. Which party and why is really not the concern here. The point is he was
targeted on the basis of him being a Muslim. My question is, should my religion
be my impediment in exercising my freedom of thought expression? I am a
teenager who has just stepped in the virtual world relating his bookish
knowledge trying to find a connect between the virtual and the real world.
There are two different questions in front of me: Were my teachers who spent
hours unravelling the definitions of those words to me, wrong? OR has the
definition of Secularism been altered by
people over time?

Many of us had come across these types of situations in our
journey through social networking sites, which is increasingly getting
converted to the means of social disconnecting site. I am not an addictive user
of Facebook though, once I did come across the hate mongers, my curiosity was
aroused. I wanted to know what they were, but little did I know that my curiosity would pay me so heavily.

The blasphemous film trailer on the Prophet Mohammed was
revolting was debated and caused violence in many places. As a believer in Islam I was hurt by the visuals. But amidst all
this dishonour that people had brought my religion I was also brought face to
face with another positive side of reality. It was heartening to note that amidst all this
anti – religious sentiments of a few is the equivocal rebuttal by not only
Muslims but by people from other faiths who reacted sharply to this incident.
It would take long to mention all so here is just one of the reactions that of
a Hindu brother, Nitish Bhardwaj who tweeted: "The Anti- Islamic video is
such a disastrous misuse of the right to expression that it SCARES me. Those
responsible are the sick pathetic fiends.

This incident was highlighted globally so everyone knows but
do you know that there are many more such pages created each day and millions of people are viewing
pages that have been created with a view to stir anger and hatred to members of
different ethnic and religious groups. More blasphemous materials related to
religions are constantly being circulated on many of the Facebook pages by
fanatics. Everyone knows that we love our Prophet (PBUH) and our Holy book
Qur’an more than our life just like a Christian would hold his faith and a
Hindu would guard his. The distasteful targeting of people on the basis of
religion is only filling young people with anger and hatred towards people of
other faiths and beliefs. Young people are led to believe twisted ideas. These
social networking sites are only adding fuel to the fire. I have come across
the images of Qur’an in the gutter, and its burning photos on Facebook and what
I am waiting to ask these people is, “What have you achieved?”

I don’t know who would want to spread so much negativity,
but I hope they are reading this, because I want to tell them that they cannot
and will not achieve anything. For you if it seems a rare case but, if you
think carefully an ocean is created drop by drop. Where are we as a global community
headed? If you think carefully these
miscreants could have been intelligent asset of the country and the world at
large, but they have lost their way being paid and misused by wrong peers and
wrong company. They represent unnecessary trivia in such a way that the
youngsters can easily accept it to be right.

We as a country have accepted secularism on paper, now all
we have to do is to inspire our young people to accept this principle and
condition them in a way that they are not easily influenced by these miscreants
who are waiting to spread hatred and unrest by using religion as a weapon.

Shabab Anwar

The writer is a young Doctor in the making keenly interested in Child Psychology. He believes his ultimate aim is 'To Serve The Society, Giving Voice To Voiceless.'

Saturday, 3 November 2012

We emerge into this world with nothing to hide. But
we are born into a complex human society, and it soon forces us to cloak
ourselves in secrets. In the 'Real' world we choose to hide many aspects of ourselves from the
world: finances or romances, opinions and frustrations, imperfections and bad
habits basically any information we believe is sensitive or personal information.The longer our lives, the more private information we accumulate.

Today the internet threatens us to strip us naked.
We are broadcasting our most sensitive and important secrets and keeping that
information available on the internet which is easily accessible all. Today
internet is collecting picture of our identities and our lives and allows
others to aggregate those information.

Life has changed to a great extent in the 20th century. The internet is filled with the stories of youngsters who “tweet” their lives away,
broadcasting their most intimate thoughts, feelings, and circumstances to
anyone who will pay attention. The current world of internet is built on the
relationships between exhibitionists who will do anything for fame and voyeurs
who find their actions fascinating.

Social media such as “Facebook” “Twitter” rely on
their users’ eagerness to share information, bothintimate and mundane, in real time. Twitter is a
fact-sharing machine, “It is said that you lie to your friends on Facebook and
share your secrets to strangers on Twitter.” We must think twice before we
share something online to anyone. Current culture is all about flaunting and
showing off your gadgets, how many credit cards you carry, how many followers
you have on Twitter, how many likes and comments you receive when
you post a picture or update your status, how popular you are on social
networks, and the Internet is one of its most prominent engines.

We must believe that privacy has value. Privacy
protects our families and our peace of mind. Privacy is a strategy for
shielding resources from thieves and our children from predators, it is a
prudent business tactic for negotiations, and it is an important social tool
when meeting new people.

Our personal information has become a commodity and
just who is exposing you online. Social networks like “Facebook” and “Twitter”
makes huge profit and their balance sheets are weighed in billions. Have you
ever wondered who are their main resources of your income? Their income depend
upon how many users are online and how many new users sign up for them daily,
weekly, and monthly. It is YOU and your personal information which you share
online. Your friends are not the only people examining your Facebook or Twitter
page. companies search social networks to screen employment candidates. In fact from estranged friends or relatives to absolute strangers all have a keen eye on your
social page. Today even the law has given information a certain evidentiary value. Remember, why your employer warns you on posting your companies private
information and even photos of the office events online. It is to prevent any
information to leak on-line and avoid any further rumours about companies
internal environment.

Who is exposing you?

You Did It Yourself

The Internet’s function of self-publication has revolutionized the way that humans communicate with each other. If you don’t believe that, spend a day with a teenager and see how she uses Facebook, Twitter, text messaging, instant messaging, to stay in touch with friends both near and far.

It is time to get dressed now. Identity theft is
considered a crime across the world. It could make you bankrupt. Everything is
done online now a days. In a fraction of second you can transfer millions
across the world via Online Banking transaction. And in other case a fraud can
lead you in trouble and your bank balance could be swept away by hackers
online. We into banking world asks our customers to be aware of fishing. It is
a serious challenge to the cyber world.

Remedies: Follow the billboard rule.

“THE BILLBOARD RULE”

This simple rule, also known as the mom and grand
mom rule, requires no software. If you would not want people to drive by your
billboard and see something posted there don’t upload it. The minute you
feel any hesitation with anything posted remember to pull it down immediately
to avoid any further hassle.

Rest we all are mature enough to differentiate what
information to be shared and what shall be kept private.

Always remember anything in the virtual world is
subject to susceptibility.o